The ball started rolling in the summer of 2022. The now retired gynecologist Geert V. came into disrepute when a man in his thirties went looking for his biological father and discovered a kinship between him and the West Flemish doctor. The mother of the donor child (38) was treated by Geert V. in the 1980s because she could not get pregnant. The gynecologist may have used his own sperm cells for the insemination.
The case came to light after the man discovered through a search of commercial DNA databases that he is genetically related to the doctor’s immediate relatives. As a result, he has strong suspicions that the sperm used at the time did not come from an unknown donor, as his parents had requested, but from Geert V. In a report for Terzake, the 38-year-old man, who wishes to remain anonymous, his account: “I think it’s wrong anyway. You go to the doctor if you want to have children. You put all your trust in that doctor. You don’t expect that man to masturbate and then inject his seed.”
Last year, the man took his research to court to force a comparative DNA test in order to obtain 100 percent certainty. The court now agrees with him and obliges the gynecologist to provide DNA. Although Geert V. can still appeal. He will probably do that too, he said in a short response.
In the summer of 2022, Geert V. was more forthcoming with comments. When asked whether or not he used his own sperm for artificial insemination in the 1980s at the then Sint-Rembert Hospital in Torhout, he replied: “I cannot confirm, but neither can I deny that I did or did not would have acted as a sperm donor.”
The file was also transferred to the public prosecutor’s office in 2022. But the case was dropped. The limitation period for unlawful practice of medicine is barely five years. The extent of the case remains unclear. In addition to the 38-year-old, three other donor children from the region were found who may have been conceived in the same way. A hospital reporting point received several reports. Geert V. has always refused to donate DNA. According to him, it was a matter of the spirit of the times and it was “a common practice” for doctors to donate sperm themselves. That statement is disputed by other gynecologists who worked in fertility clinics at the time.
No heir
Now it appears that there will be a comparative DNA test. The court finds that in this case the plaintiff’s right to obtain certainty regarding his biological parentage prevails over the gynecologist’s right to conceal his biological paternity. The court took into account, among other things, the fact that anonymity should be reciprocal: prospective parents and donors do not know each other, but in this case Geert V. knows very well whether or not he is the biological father.
The court finds that in this file the plaintiff’s right to obtain certainty regarding his biological parentage prevails over the gynecologist’s right to conceal his biological paternity
In 2015, the donor child contacted the gynecologist in question for the first time, because he had become a father himself and wanted to find out more about the blind spot in his biological origins. The doctor responded negatively and has continued to refuse any cooperation since then, says Joris Beernaert, lawyer for the 38-year-old man. “If he appeals, we won’t have certainty for another year. But my client is very positive. He certainly doesn’t want to become an heir, but is one step closer to finding his origins. My client wants to know where half of his genetic baggage comes from and he wants to be able to tell his children from whom they descend.”
It is the first time that such a case has been conducted in our country. Such cases have already been conducted abroad, including in the Netherlands, where it came to light that doctor Jan Karbaat had fathered dozens of so-called donor children with his own sperm. There are no comparable precedents in our country. In the well-known lawsuit of Princess Delphine against King Albert II, it was ruled that limitation does not apply to the question of genetic descent.
